For decades, the idea of a “good job” was measured with a simple formula: a stable contract and competitive salary. That rule does not seem to hold in the same way for Generation Z, broadly understood as those born between 1995 and 2010. As they join the workforce in greater numbers, this new cohort is helping to redefine what work and leadership mean. Salary still matters, of course, particularly when it comes to gaining independence in a time of high living costs, but many young people no longer see pay as the decisive factor in choosing or staying in a job. Instead, they are attentive to whether companies are genuine in their values, whether their work carries purpose, and whether employers are aware of their social impact.
As a lecturer on undergraduate and master’s programmes such as Business Administration and Marketing at EAE Business School, I have spent more than a decade observing this generation closely. Among my students, many of them aged between 18 and 25 years old, very few talk about building a lifelong career in a single company. The desire for stability exists, but it is outweighed by a readiness to move on if they feel disconnected from an organisation’s values, if opportunities for professional growth are blocked, or if the work environment becomes hostile. For many of them, work is important but not central to their identity. They value their lives beyond the professional sphere, and they organise their priorities accordingly.
When asked about what they look for in employers, my students consistently mention flexibility in schedule and location, attention to mental health and emotional well-being, continuous learning opportunities, visible inclusion and diversity policies, and the chance for international mobility. Many also expect mentoring or coaching to be available, which they see as both a personal and professional resource. Above all, they want balance between their professional and private lives.
In terms of leadership, there are differences with previous generations. Many of my students question rigid hierarchies and do not respond well to authoritarian approaches. They prefer leaders who are accessible and empathetic, who act as role models and create an environment of trust and continuous learning. When those qualities are absent, they are not hesitant to leave.
On the other hand, they value leaders who foster psychological safety, invite feedback, and encourage collaboration. Such leadership styles strengthen team cohesion, enhance creativity, and support a culture in which employees feel comfortable taking initiative and experimenting.
The future of commitment
Some critics may say that Generation Z is less committed or less loyal to their employers. In my experience, it would be more accurate to say that they express commitment in different ways. Loyalty is not guaranteed by a permanent contract or a pay rise, but is shaped by meaningful projects, recognition, and a sense that leaders listen and support them. They do not want to be closely controlled; they want to feel guided and valued. Companies that meet these expectations may not retain their employees for decades, but they are more likely to keep them engaged and motivated during their time there.
Ignoring these signals can be expensive. Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace 2024 shows that low employee engagement costs the global economy an estimated $8.9 trillion every year, equivalent to about 9% of global GDP. In practical terms, disengagement translates into lost productivity, weakened performance, and higher turnover. For organisations already struggling to retain younger staff, these costs accumulate quickly. When motivated employees leave, projects lose momentum, knowledge is lost, and managers spend valuable time filling vacancies instead of focusing on long-term goals.
For organisations already struggling to retain younger staff, these costs accumulate quickly
There are reputational consequences as well. Generation Z is highly active on platforms such as LinkedIn, Glassdoor, TikTok and Instagram, and they are quick to share negative experiences. A single critical post can spread widely, damaging an employer brand in ways that traditional communication cannot easily repair. There is also a strategic cost: by failing to integrate digital natives into their organisations, companies risk missing out on perspectives that are crucial for innovation and adaptation in fast-changing markets.
Yet there are also clear opportunities. Generation Z’s demands are not necessarily at odds with organisational goals. A focus on flexibility, transparency and inclusion can strengthen employee engagement across the workforce. Policies that support mental health or lifelong learning are valued by older employees as well. In this sense, responding to Generation Z can create broader benefits rather than favouring only one demographic group.
A sense of purpose
It is worth noting, too, that this generation has grown up in a period marked by climate anxiety, digital transformation, and economic uncertainty. Their insistence on purpose and authenticity is not a superficial preference but reflects the conditions they have experienced. They are digital natives, used to finding information quickly and comparing options, and this shapes how they approach employment. They can spot inconsistencies between a company’s public image and its internal practices, whether through social media, employee reviews, or online news. Their assessment of authenticity is therefore both informed and immediate, influencing not only their own choices but also how their peers perceive the organisation.
The workplace is evolving and leadership styles that worked in the past may be less effective
For organisations, adapting to these expectations does not mean abandoning standards or indulging every demand. It means recognising that the workplace is evolving and that leadership styles that worked in the past may be less effective with new generations. Open communication, genuine commitment to values, and willingness to rethink rigid hierarchies can help companies reduce friction and align better with their younger workforce.
Ultimately, Generation Z’s presence in the labour market highlights a tension: some companies view them as a problem to be managed, while others see them as a catalyst for necessary change. The way employers choose to respond will shape not only their ability to recruit and retain young talent, but also their capacity to remain competitive in an environment where reputation, culture and social impact matter more than ever.
September 24, 2025
Young people aren’t lazy or disloyal. They just expect different leadership
by Claudia Chianese • Comment, Workplace
As a lecturer on undergraduate and master’s programmes such as Business Administration and Marketing at EAE Business School, I have spent more than a decade observing this generation closely. Among my students, many of them aged between 18 and 25 years old, very few talk about building a lifelong career in a single company. The desire for stability exists, but it is outweighed by a readiness to move on if they feel disconnected from an organisation’s values, if opportunities for professional growth are blocked, or if the work environment becomes hostile. For many of them, work is important but not central to their identity. They value their lives beyond the professional sphere, and they organise their priorities accordingly.
When asked about what they look for in employers, my students consistently mention flexibility in schedule and location, attention to mental health and emotional well-being, continuous learning opportunities, visible inclusion and diversity policies, and the chance for international mobility. Many also expect mentoring or coaching to be available, which they see as both a personal and professional resource. Above all, they want balance between their professional and private lives.
In terms of leadership, there are differences with previous generations. Many of my students question rigid hierarchies and do not respond well to authoritarian approaches. They prefer leaders who are accessible and empathetic, who act as role models and create an environment of trust and continuous learning. When those qualities are absent, they are not hesitant to leave.
On the other hand, they value leaders who foster psychological safety, invite feedback, and encourage collaboration. Such leadership styles strengthen team cohesion, enhance creativity, and support a culture in which employees feel comfortable taking initiative and experimenting.
The future of commitment
Some critics may say that Generation Z is less committed or less loyal to their employers. In my experience, it would be more accurate to say that they express commitment in different ways. Loyalty is not guaranteed by a permanent contract or a pay rise, but is shaped by meaningful projects, recognition, and a sense that leaders listen and support them. They do not want to be closely controlled; they want to feel guided and valued. Companies that meet these expectations may not retain their employees for decades, but they are more likely to keep them engaged and motivated during their time there.
Ignoring these signals can be expensive. Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace 2024 shows that low employee engagement costs the global economy an estimated $8.9 trillion every year, equivalent to about 9% of global GDP. In practical terms, disengagement translates into lost productivity, weakened performance, and higher turnover. For organisations already struggling to retain younger staff, these costs accumulate quickly. When motivated employees leave, projects lose momentum, knowledge is lost, and managers spend valuable time filling vacancies instead of focusing on long-term goals.
There are reputational consequences as well. Generation Z is highly active on platforms such as LinkedIn, Glassdoor, TikTok and Instagram, and they are quick to share negative experiences. A single critical post can spread widely, damaging an employer brand in ways that traditional communication cannot easily repair. There is also a strategic cost: by failing to integrate digital natives into their organisations, companies risk missing out on perspectives that are crucial for innovation and adaptation in fast-changing markets.
Yet there are also clear opportunities. Generation Z’s demands are not necessarily at odds with organisational goals. A focus on flexibility, transparency and inclusion can strengthen employee engagement across the workforce. Policies that support mental health or lifelong learning are valued by older employees as well. In this sense, responding to Generation Z can create broader benefits rather than favouring only one demographic group.
A sense of purpose
It is worth noting, too, that this generation has grown up in a period marked by climate anxiety, digital transformation, and economic uncertainty. Their insistence on purpose and authenticity is not a superficial preference but reflects the conditions they have experienced. They are digital natives, used to finding information quickly and comparing options, and this shapes how they approach employment. They can spot inconsistencies between a company’s public image and its internal practices, whether through social media, employee reviews, or online news. Their assessment of authenticity is therefore both informed and immediate, influencing not only their own choices but also how their peers perceive the organisation.
For organisations, adapting to these expectations does not mean abandoning standards or indulging every demand. It means recognising that the workplace is evolving and that leadership styles that worked in the past may be less effective with new generations. Open communication, genuine commitment to values, and willingness to rethink rigid hierarchies can help companies reduce friction and align better with their younger workforce.
Ultimately, Generation Z’s presence in the labour market highlights a tension: some companies view them as a problem to be managed, while others see them as a catalyst for necessary change. The way employers choose to respond will shape not only their ability to recruit and retain young talent, but also their capacity to remain competitive in an environment where reputation, culture and social impact matter more than ever.
Dr. Claudia Chianese is assistant professor of People Leadership and Management at EAE Business School, one of Spain’s main business schools.